Dianetics
and Standard
Tech
Dianetics has had a changing history. In 1950, the whole subject
started with the famous Book One, "Dianetics, The Modern Science of
Mental Health" (did you know the Church of Scientology changed even the
title of that book?) which became a real best-seller. In the oncoming
years Dianetics and engram running became not forgotten, but it did not
rank high amongst the various techniques that were applied by
Scientologists world-wide. Only after LRH had researched practically
all of the bridge as we know it today (especially Grades and the OT
levels 1-3) Dianetics could have a renaissance which it had with the
advent of Standard Dianetics in 1969. Most probably it was an essential
factor in the big expansion of Scientology in the following years. Easy
to teach and apply it was something that brought people in the
Academies and the HGCs in droves. 1978 Standard Dianetics was
superseded by New Era Dianetics (NED). It is quite questionable how
much of this is "original LRH" if you take into account that the
content of several of the so-called HCOBs had been in BTBs before. Also
we don't know whether LRH in the long run would have made changes and
adjustments to NED, because as we know soon afterwards - or even before
that point in time - he retired not only from the administrative, but
also the technical lines.
The articles in this section discuss various aspects of Dianetics and
NED that are of great import to the application of Dianetics.
ARTICLES
ABOUT DIANETICS
- Dianetics and the Grade Chart - In the article "New Theory of the New Grade
Chart" Caspar de Rijk contends that Dianetics belongs before the
Scientology Grades (and not vice-versa, the way it is delivered in the
Church of Scientology since 1981). Heimdal has written a reply to that and argues
that both variants are possible, depending on the individual pc.
- Changes in the Dianetic technique brought by NED - Caspar de Rijk
analyses in "New Era
Dianetics vs. Standard Dianetics" the major points of change in NED
compared with Standard Dianetics and comes to the conclusion that they
are either arbitrary or unnecessary and violate earlier tech. Heimdal
in his comment takes a
different stand and narrows the gap between NED and Standard Dianetics
that Caspar de Rijk has torn open.